The GAO's decision eliminates any hopes for a quick resolution of the protest. "This means we're going to go through the entire process," a senior Air Force official observed. The GAO is expected to rule on Boeing's protest by late June, although that deadline could be pushed back, if required.

In their motions to dismiss the protest, both the Air Force and Northrop-Grumman claimed that some of Boeing's objections should have been raised before the company submitted its final bid.

Boeing said it was encouraged by the GAO's decision.

Given the political tempest surrounding this contract, it's no surprise that the GAO refused to dismiss Boeing's protest. And while they won't admit it, neither the Air Force nor Northrop-Grumman was taken aback by yesterday's decision. Their efforts to dismiss the protest were almost a formality. With billions of dollars--and thousands of jobs--on the table, no one expected the GAO to summarily reject the Boeing protest, and give a green light to the Northrop-Grumman contract.

We'll also go out on a (short) limb and predict that the GAO's final decision may not be announced until the late summer or early fall. There's simply too much riding on this contract, giving the GAO more reason to fully scrutinize Boeing's protest.

If by narrowed, Northrop Grumman means there's fewer main thrusts of the protest, and by 'expanded' Boeing means piling on details and hearsay to the remaining points, then they are both right. Having trudged through Boeing's summaries so far, Boeing can only truly claim expansion because they still refer to the original protest: but they're not talking about a lot of what was in it. Boeing's "lawyered up" pretty good, but if their protest had half the technical merit they're claiming, they would let the protest stand on its own without the unprecedented public manuevering. Boeing is relying on people getting their news from their PR machine and hoping to influence the politicos to intervene, because from what I'm seeing the GAO doesn't have a thread to use in recommending the contract be overturned.